My third wedding

joshhuntnm

Let me say first. . . it is a little intimidating posting pics on here. Some of the pics some of you guys take are amazing. I have learned so much on here, but I have SOOOOOOOOO much more to learn.

The setting of this wedding was not that great. Has anyone been to Tularoso, NM? Say no more. So, it didn't provide for any beautiful backgrounds.

Two big learnings from this wedding.
1) Ask for 30 minutes with the guys and 30 minutes with the gals before the wedding. Make an appointed time when they will agree to be dressed and ready. I was asked to get there at 2. Shot the first shot at 3.15, and then, everyone wasn't there. There was a real "manana attitude". (most people think that means tomorrow; I am told it really means, "not now; later." It is a state of mind.) There were some great places to take pics where I was at 2.00, but 2 of the guys never came; went directly to the church. Do I sound frustrated? Live and learn.

2) My next purchase is a battery pack for the flash. It looks like I will be able to fire and fire without waiting for the flash to recycle.

All taken with my XTI and Dawson (my son)'s 17 - 55. why buy when you can mooch off your son?

Anyway, here are a few shots.

1


2


3 -- natural light as the sun was setting.


4 they are on this little pony drawn carriage. The almost kisses, for you, Scott!


5


6 -- two umbrella flashes on either side of me.


7 look closely and you will notice the background is not much to look at. I tried to get rid of most of it without getting them in a cave.


8 two umbrellas pretty close on either side.

davidjay

Great job Josh! Number 7 was my favorite! It evokes a lot of emotion and you have a lot of options with it if you wanted to crop it in tighter or try other stuff.

again, great job!
DJ

joshhuntnm

thanks for the comments.

I forgot to say, cc welcome, always.

heatherfeather

I can really see your growth and that is a GREAT thing! We are all learning, but it seems like you got pretty good fairly quickly! I wish my photography could grow that much better between weddings!

For some strange reason, my fav of the set is the garter toss one. Nice lighting and great timing on the shot! The rest are all nice as well- you have some really good exposures and I bet the B & G will be quite happy.

dawssvt

Pictures look great, Dad. I LOVE #1! Gotta love the 17-55 f/2.8 IS!

Scott_Quier

Gotta agree with DJ on this - #7 is the "pick of the litter" - love the emotion. The others are fine and some are much much better than fine, but 7 is emotional and unposed (or at least it looks unposed). Love it :ivar

joshhuntnm

Scott_Quier wrote:

Gotta agree with DJ on this - #7 is the "pick of the litter" - love the emotion. The others are fine and some are much much better than fine, but 7 is emotional and unposed (or at least it looks unposed). Love it :ivar

Thanks, Scott. It is unposed. They are dancing.

JohnBiggs

Do you mean to keep the background that dark? I'd drag the shutter more. Making #7 with a very dark background is one thing, but there are several others.

Also a tip on batteries and lenses.

The lens I love for weddings is the 28-75 2.8 and it's not too expensive.

I use the latest rechargables in my flash (specifically Kodak Pre-Charged from walmart for about $8.) They cycle the flash quicker and last longer. Then I also have the Canon AA battery pack for my flash (about $125).

I really like your photos.

Thanks,
John

Elaine

I can definitely see large improvements in your wedding shots! Very nice job, Josh! Your exposures and expressions caught look great. I'm sure they'll be happy.
Sorry to hear of your frustrations. I'm soaking up the bad with the good as it looks like I'll be shooting my first wedding next July. So keep the lessons coming!

joshhuntnm

JohnBiggs wrote:

Do you mean to keep the background that dark? I'd drag the shutter more. Making #7 with a very dark background is one thing, but there are several others.

Also a tip on batteries and lenses.

The lens I love for weddings is the 28-75 2.8 and it's not too expensive.

I use the latest rechargables in my flash (specifically Kodak Pre-Charged from walmart for about $8.) They cycle the flash quicker and last longer. Then I also have the Canon AA battery pack for my flash (about $125).

I really like your photos.

Thanks,
John

Most of the dark was actually added in, so yeah, I liked it better than the background that was there. As I said, it was not a real attractive setting.

Is that the Tamron 28 - 75 that you like?

Scott_Quier

The Tammy 28-75 is a very sweet lens. Like everything else, it has it's drawbacks. For the Tammy, it tends to hunt a bit in darker environments. But, when it focus locks (which it easily does the greatest majority of the time), my copy is super sharp.

JohnBiggs

joshhuntnm wrote:

Is that the Tamron 28 - 75 that you like?

Yep. Its super sharp and my favorite lens for everything. I use it much more than my 70-200 2.8L IS. One of it's biggest features is its size/weight.

jeffreaux2

I like the journalistic feel of #4. It would be even stronger in a nice rich black and white.

The Tamron 28-75 F2.8 is a very good lens. Compared to the 17-55 F2.8, yes, it will focus a bit slower, and tends not to be as sharp...probably due to the lack of stabilization. I bought one as my first non-kit lens and then built my tiny portrait business on it's goodness. I recently sold mine, and wonder now what I should do to put a macro lens back in my bag.

While not a true macro, it can produce some fine ring and detail shots...aside from the portraits it is so good at.

Travis

I know it has been said but the speed at which your photography has progressed over the last several months is outstanding. I wish I could improve as quickly. I'm with the rest on the natural emotion on #7, a very memorable capture. #1, at least for my preference, would be great if the saturation of the bouqet was toned down a bit. I like the selective colorization of the photos but richness of the red is little more distracting. A little more subtle toning would heighten the romance of the event. Then again, I'm sure that someone else would prefer it as is so take it with a grain of salt!

joshhuntnm

Travis wrote:

I know it has been said but the speed at which your photography has progressed over the last several months is outstanding. I wish I could improve as quickly. I'm with the rest on the natural emotion on #7, a very memorable capture. #1, at least for my preference, would be great if the saturation of the bouqet was toned down a bit. I like the selective colorization of the photos but richness of the red is little more distracting. A little more subtle toning would heighten the romance of the event. Then again, I'm sure that someone else would prefer it as is so take it with a grain of salt!

Great thing about lightroom -- make a virtual copy and give the bride both. thanks for the comment.

whatever improvement I have made i largely a testimony to the helpfulness of this forum.

LensCap

Josh,
I've been gone for awhile but one of the first things I looked for was to see how you were doing...Heck, Josh is doing good!!! Nice shots and congrats on your "progression", you're doing great!

angevin1

heatherfeather wrote:

I can really see your growth and that is a GREAT thing! We are all learning, but it seems like you got pretty good fairly quickly! I wish my photography could grow that much better between weddings!

For some strange reason, my fav of the set is the garter toss one. Nice lighting and great timing on the shot! The rest are all nice as well- you have some really good exposures and I bet the B & G will be quite happy.

concur!!

great stuff!

Shima

Gotta love the 17-55 Love the shots you've posted here, keep up the good work! I love watching people grow through dgrin since I am constantly growing myself.

joshhuntnm

Shima wrote:

Gotta love the 17-55 Love the shots you've posted here, keep up the good work! I love watching people grow through dgrin since I am constantly growing myself.

I really like it. Although. . . I think I am going to get the 24 - 105L f4 IS when I get some money one of these days. My thought is, I like the longer focal length, and when Dawson or I do weddings, we will have access to both.

Let me know if that does not sound smart to anybody.

Scott_Quier

joshhuntnm wrote:

I really like it. Although. . . I think I am going to get the 24 - 105L f4 IS when I get some money one of these days. My thought is, I like the longer focal length, and when Dawson or I do weddings, we will have access to both.

Let me know if that does not sound smart to anybody.

I'm thinking this is probably not your best move as it is an f/4 - even though it does have the IS. I have one and find it too long on the short end for indoor work.

If I need long, I pull out the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. This is, to my mind, a much better match to the 17-55. What really carries it is the f/2.8 and the IS

Shima

Scott_Quier wrote:

I'm thinking this is probably not your best move as it is an f/4 - even though it does have the IS. I have one and find it too long on the short end for indoor work.

If I need long, I pull out the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. This is, to my mind, a much better match to the 17-55. What really carries it is the f/2.8 and the IS

Yeah, and consider that I went from a 24-105 to trade for the 17-55 instead specifically because of the weddings and things I do. I don't miss the 24-105.

joshhuntnm

Scott_Quier wrote:

I'm thinking this is probably not your best move as it is an f/4 - even though it does have the IS. I have one and find it too long on the short end for indoor work.

If I need long, I pull out the 70-200 f/2.8L IS. This is, to my mind, a much better match to the 17-55. What really carries it is the f/2.8 and the IS

Well, my thought is, at least for this stage in life, I will have access to both. I can borrow Dawson's when I do weddings and he can borrow mine when he does weddings. This will give us a little variety. If I didn't have access to his, I might go with the 17 - 55. It is a great lens. I operate on the assumption that the 24 - 105 is equally sharp, although I give up the wide, get more long, and give up the 2.8.

Your point about a long one is good, but I don't want that as a next lens for the other part of my life -- day to day use. I have a couple of primes I use for every day/ walk around use now - 50 and 85.